Americans United - John F. Kennedyhttps://www.au.org/tags/john-f-kennedy
enPresidential Proclamationshttps://www.au.org/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/presidential-proclamations
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>The year was 1832, and a cholera epidemic was ravaging the United States.</p><p>Doctors of the day were powerless to stop the disease. As its depredations spread, some desperate members of Congress decided that only divine intervention could save the country. They proposed an official day of fasting, humiliation and prayer.</p><p>President Andrew Jackson was not impressed. Jackson announced that if Congress were to pass such a resolution, he would not sign it into law.</p><p>“I could not do otherwise without transcending the limits prescribed by the Constitution for the president; and without feeling that I might in some degree disturb the security which religion now enjoys in this country in its complete separation from the political concerns of the General Government,” Jackson wrote in a letter to a religious group.</p><p>The proclamation floundered in Congress, and eventually the epidemic ran its course. Outside of historians, few Americans know about Jackson’s comments today – but they should. The incident is a reminder of the role a president can play in safeguarding the separation of church and state.</p><p>Since the founding of the American republic, chief executives have stepped up to defend the church-state wall by reminding the American people of the importance of religious liberty for all. By promoting legislation, vetoing bills that would mix religion and government and using the bully pulpit, presidents can be powerful advocates for the Constitution and the values it embodies. (Of course, they can also lay waste to those ideas, and some have done so.)</p><p>This month, as the nation marks Presidents Day, it’s a good time to remember a few of the best comments about separation of church and state uttered by chief executives. Some of these will be familiar, others less so. Some were stated by presidents regarded as great by historians, others were less successful.</p><p>Whether a titan or a caretaker, presidents have reeled off memorable lines about religious liberty. <em>Church &amp; State</em> is offering 10 here. Rather than list them in chronological order, we’ll give them in a sequence from good statements to truly great ones (admittedly a somewhat subjective process), along with some background.</p><p>Bear in mind that not every one of these statements was delivered while the president in question was in office. Also, in some cases, antiquated spellings, punctuation, capitalization and abbreviations have been retained.</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>John Tyler (1841-45)</u></strong></p><p><em>“The United States have adventured upon a great and noble ex­­periment, which is believed to have been hazarded in the absence of all previous precedent – that of total separation of church and state. No religious establishment by law exists among us.”</em></p><p>If John Tyler is remembered for anything today, it’s that he was the first vice president to assume the office of chief executive upon the death of the president. Tyler took office after William Henry Harrison died less than a month after being inaugurated.</p><p>Tyler wrote the passage above in 1843 in response to a letter he receive from Joseph Simpson, a Jewish resident of Baltimore. Simpson was upset that a high-ranking military officer planned to appear at a Christian conference.</p><p>In his response, Tyler noted that the general was attending the event as a private citizen and not “in his character in General and Chief of the Army. He will necessarily for the time being lay aside his sword and epaulets and appear, it is true, as a distinguished citizen but in no other light than as a citizen.”</p><p>In the same letter, Tyler notes that religious freedom extends to all creeds and says a “Mohammedan” would have the right to worship according to the Quran and an East Indian “might erect a shrine to Brahma if it so pleased him.” (Source: <em>Wil­liam and Mary Historical Magazine</em>, July 1904)</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)</u></strong></p><p><em>“I think the government ought to stay out of the prayer business....”</em></p><p>Unlike many U.S. presidents, Jimmy Carter was not a law­yer. But he was uniquely qualified to comment on the role of religion in public life as a devout Southern Baptist and a Sunday school teacher.</p><p>On April 6, 1979, Carter was asked about prayer in public schools during a press conference. A reporter noted that U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) had added an amendment to an education bill that called for “voluntary” prayer in public schools. The reporter wanted to know if Carter thought this was unconstitutional.</p><p>Carter’s response is memorable. He went on to stress that no child should be coerced to take part in religious activity in a public school. Carter said he wanted to avoid a situation “where the child would feel constrained to pray.” (Source: Associated Press dispatch, April 7, 1979</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>Rutherford B. Hayes (1877-81)</u></strong></p><p><em>“We all agree that neither the Government nor political parties ought to interfere with religious sects. It is equal­ly true that religious sects ought not to interfere with the Government or with political parties. We believe that the cause of good government and the cause of religion suffer by all such interference.”</em></p><p>Rutherford B. Hayes began his term with controversy. He lost the popular vote to Democrat Samuel Tilden, and the election was decided in his favor only after disputed electoral votes in Florida were awarded to Hayes as part of a political deal that ended Reconstruction in the South. His presidency was undistinguished.</p><p>Hayes made these comments before being elected president. He was addressing the residents of Lawrence County, Ohio, on July 31, 1875, while preparing to run for governor. The lengthy speech is wide ranging, but a good chunk of it deals with a festering controversy over the role of religion in public institutions. Hayes accused the “sectarian wing of the Democratic Party” of “agitation,” and he pledged to defend the secular nature of “our free schools.” In response, Democrats argued that the controversy wasn’t really about public schools. Rather, they said, they simply wanted to allow Catholic prison inmates to have the ability to meet with priests. (Source: <em>The Life, Public Services and Select Speeches of Rutherford B. Hayes</em> by James Quay Howard, 1876)</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>James A. Garfield (1881)</u></strong></p><p><em>“Whatever help the nation can justly afford should be generously given to aid the States in supporting common schools; but it would be unjust to our people and dangerous to our institutions to apply any portion of the revenues of the nation or of the States to the support of sectarian schools. The separation of Church and State in everything relating to taxation should be absolute.”</em></p><p>Prior to being elected president, James Garfield was a lay preacher in the Disciples of Christ denomination. Although never formally ordained, he performed many of the functions of a minister and regularly delivered sermons. Yet Garfield was a strong supporter of separation of church and state, so much so that he resigned as a church elder upon being elected.</p><p>The passage above comes from a letter Garfield wrote on July 12, 1880, to accept the Republican Party’s nomination for the presidency. During his inaugural address, delivered on March 4, 1881, Garfield discussed the growing Mormon presence in the Utah territory. He called for freedom of conscience but expressed concerns that the Mormons were attempting to create a theocracy, a prospect he clearly found troubling.</p><p>Candice Millard, a leading Gar­field biographer, believes he had the potential to be a great president. It was not to be. Less than a year after his election, Garfield was shot by Charles Guiteau, a deranged man who believed that Garfield owed him a government job. Unsanitary medical practices of the time led the wound to become infected, and Garfield died on Sept. 19, 1881. (Source: <em>The Republican Campaign Textbook for 1880</em>, Republican Congressional Committee, 1880)</p><p> </p><p><u><strong>Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-45)</strong></u></p><p><em>“The lessons of religious toleration – a toleration which re­cog­nizes com- plete liberty of human thought, liberty of conscience – is one which, by precept and example, must be inculcated in the hearts and minds of all Americans if the institutions of our democracy are to be maintained and perpetuated. We must recognize the fundamental rights of man. There can be no true national life in our democracy unless we give unqualified recognition to freedom of religious worship and freedom of education.”</em></p><p>Among the many things President Franklin D. Roosevelt is notable for is his famous “Four Freedoms” speech. During his 1941 State of the Union address, Roosevelt outlined four freedoms that people everywhere should enjoy – freedom of worship, freedom of speech, freedom from want and freedom from fear.</p><p>Roosevelt was a consistent supporter of freedom of conscience. The passage quoted appears in a March 30, 1937, letter Roosevelt wrote to Michael Williams of New York City in recognition of a celebration marking the anniversary of the establishment of religious liberty in Maryland by the Calvert family. (Source: The American Presidency Project, http:­// ­www.presi­dency.­­ucsb.­­edu/­ws/?pid=15382)</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>George Washington (1789-97)</u></strong></p><p><em>“The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy – a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”</em></p><p>Our nation’s first president was a strong advocate for religious freedom all of his life. Washington said many memorable things about freedom of conscience during his public career, but few match the rhetorical heights of his Aug. 18, 1790, letter to the members of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, R.I., issued during a period when the president was visiting the state. </p><p>Jews were a small minority in the United States, and some were uncertain if their right to worship would be protected in the new nation. When members of the synagogue wrote to Washington, this was by no means clear. The Bill of Rights was still pending in Congress, and state legislatures were deliberating the amendments. Some historians believe Washington’s visit to New England at this time was an effort to rally support for the proposed amendments. His words served as a stirring reminder that all faiths would be respected in the new nation and today stand as a rebuke to the “Christian nation” crowd. (Source: <em>A Documentary History of Religion in America to 1877</em>, edited by Edwin S. Gaustad and Mark Knoll, third edition, 2003)</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>Ulysses S. Grant (1869-77)</u></strong></p><p>“<em>Resolve that neither the state nor nation, nor both combined, shall support institutions of learning other than those sufficient to afford to every child growing up in the land the opportunity of a good common school education, unmixed with sectarian, pagan, or atheistical dogmas. Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate.”</em></p><p>Former Civil War general U.S. Grant was president during a time when public education (often called “common schools” back then) began to accelerate in the United States. As more and more states passed mandatory education laws, controversy arose about the role of religion in education and whether tax aid should be extended to private religious institutions.</p><p>Grant’s solution was to reserve tax funding for public schools but also to remove sectarian instruction from those institutions, thus opening them up to Americans of all faiths and none. He outlined this vision in a speech before a group of Civil War veterans meeting in Des Moines, Iowa, on Sept. 30, 1875. (Source: <em>New York Tribune</em>, Oct. 1, 1875)</p><p> </p><p><strong><u>John F. Kennedy (1961-63)</u></strong></p><p><em>“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute – where no Catholic pre­late would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote – where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference – and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him. I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish – where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source – where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials – and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”</em></p><p>Young, charismatic and smart, John F. Kennedy was a natural politician. He seemed destined for high office, but when, as U.S. senator from Massachusetts, he decided to seek the presidency, there was a problem: his religion.</p><p>Kennedy was a Roman Catholic during a time when a certain degree of anti-Catholic animus still held sway among the population. No Catholic had sought the highest office in the land on a major party ticket since Democratic New York Gov. Al Smith in 1928. Kennedy knew he had to win over a skeptical Protestant majority.</p><p>He did it in part with a masterful speech delivered before the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on Sept. 12, 1960. During the speech, Kennedy vowed support for separation of church and state and made it clear that he had no intention of taking orders from the hierarchy of his own church or any other. He vowed to do what was best for the American people.</p><p>The election was close, but Ken­nedy came out on top; historians still debate to what extent this speech turned the tide, but one thing is clear: It wasn’t mere words. As president, Kennedy proved that his talk in Houston wasn’t an empty promise. He opposed tax aid for private religious schools, supported the Supreme Court’s rulings striking down mandatory prayer and Bible reading in public schools and backed international population-control programs that emphasized the use of birth control – against the wishes of the Catholic bishops.</p><p>Kennedy’s strong record in support of separation of church and state has been compared favorably to Thomas Jefferson’s. (Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum)</p><p> </p><p><u><strong>James Madison (1809-17)</strong></u></p><p><em>“It was the universal opinion of the Century preceding the last, that Civil Govt. could not stand without the prop of a Religious establishment, &amp; that the [Christian] religion itself, would perish if not supported by a legal provision for its Clergy. The experience of Virginia conspicuously corroborates the disproof of both opinions. The Civil Govt. tho’ bereft of every thing like an associated hierarchy possesses the requisite Stability and performs its functions with complete success: Whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood &amp; the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State.”</em></p><p>James Madison knew a few things about separation of church and state. After all, he was a primary author of the First Amendment and is considered the “Father of the Constitution.”</p><p>The passage above comes from a letter Madison penned to a friend, Robert Walsh, on March 2, 1819, two years after Madison left the White House. Walsh had written to Madison to say that he was seeking to rebut claims about the United States that he had heard were circulating abroad. He specifically sought information from Madison about the status of religion in Virginia in the wake of the Revolution. Madison, who along with Jefferson led the fight to end the established church in that state, was well qualified to comment.</p><p>In his letter to Walsh, Madison discussed at length the state of religious groups in Virginia. He noted that several of the churches that had belonged to the officially established Anglican Church had “gone to ruin” or were “dilapidated” because residents had taken advantage of their religious liberty to join other churches. But he pointed out that there was no lack of interest in religion among Virginians and portrayed a robust faith scene in the Old Dominion, a state of affairs he attributed to the separation of church and state.</p><p>During his long career and into his retirement, Madison spoke frequently about the right of conscience, religious liberty and separation of church and state. In a doc­ument known as “The Detached Memoranda,” which scholars believe was written between 1817 and 1832, Madison observed, “Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion &amp; Govt. in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history.” (Source: <em>James Madison on Religious Liberty</em>, edited by Robert S. Alley, 1985)</p><p> </p><p><u><strong>Thomas Jefferson (1801-09)</strong></u></p><p><em>“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.”</em></p><p>Thomas Jefferson’s famous meta­phor of a wall of separation between church and state has rung down through the ages and influenced law and public policy for more than 200 years.</p><p>Over the years, Religious Right activists and pseudo-historians have spread much misinformation about this passage in an attempt to debunk it or minimize its importance. These efforts fail once the true history of it is known.</p><p>Jefferson wrote the passage in a letter to the Danbury, Conn., Baptist Association on Jan. 1, 1802. The Baptists had written to Jefferson precisely because they knew him to be a champion of freedom of conscience and religious liberty. Baptists in Connecticut at the time were still subjected to a powerful combination of church and state, with the church in question being Congregationalism. Distraught over this state of affairs, the Baptists wrote to say that they looked forward to the day when Jefferson’s vision of religious liberty for all would encompass them too.</p><p>Jefferson asked his attorney general and postmaster general to read his proposed reply and give feedback. He made it clear that he viewed the letter as an opportunity to state his views on religious freedom. Jefferson likely knew the letter would find its way to the press (which it quickly did) and be widely reprinted. The real story of the letter cuts against claims that Jefferson merely dashed off his reply as a courtesy. In fact, he viewed the letter as an opportunity to make a major policy statement, and he put significant thought into the reply. In the days before mass media, letters to constituents were often used for this purpose.</p><p>Jefferson’s eloquent passage about the church-state wall is still being cited today, but it has many detractors. Former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist attacked the metaphor in a 1985 Supreme Court ruling (before Rehnquist was chief justice), calling it “a metaphor based on bad history” that is “useless.”</p><p>Thankfully, many other judges and politicians have felt differently, and Jefferson’s words still give hope to people today who are living under the heel of religious oppression. (Source: Library of Congress)</p><p>* * *</p><p>Not every president has been a champion of church-state separation, of course. Woodrow Wilson was prone to discourse on his belief that the United States was founded as a “Christian nation.” Dwight D. Eisenhower ushered in the period of “civil religion” by promoting “In God We Trust” as the national motto and supporting the insertion of “under God” into the Pledge of Allegiance. Ronald Reagan pushed for a School Prayer Amendment to the Constitution throughout his presidency.</p><p>But those presidents who have supported a distance between religion and government have left a legacy of words and deeds that still inspire many today. </p></div></div><a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><h3 >U.S. Chief Executives Have Said Some Wonderful Things About Separation Of Church And State Over The Years. Here Are Ten Great&nbsp;Ones.</h3><div class="field field-name-field-cs-department field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Featured</div></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-cs-issue field-type-node-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Magazine Issue:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><article id="node-11691" class="node node-church-state-issue clearfix">
<header>
<div class="image">
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="https://www.au.org/files/styles/cs_cover_thumbnail/public/Feb%2016%20Web%20cover.jpg?itok=Ey3M4LWe" width="75" height="97" alt="" /></div></div></div> </div>
<h2><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state">
The <span class="cs-month field">February</span> <span class="cs-year field"><span class="date-display-single">2016</span></span> issue of <em>Church &amp; State</em>
</a></h2>
<span class="read-more">
<a href="/church-state">Browse previous issues &raquo;</a>
</span>
</header>
<div class="content">
<div class="frontpage-block frontpage-view-church-state-articles-featured-articles" >
<h3>Featured Articles</h3>
<div class="content">
<div class="view view-church-state-articles view-id-church_state_articles view-display-id-featured_articles view-dom-id-6ef20c1e67603eef59636f8bd90f9772">
<div class="view-content">
<div class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first">
<h3 class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/the-last-political-taboo">The Last Political Taboo?</a></h3>
<h4>The U.S. Constitution Forbids &#039;Religious Tests&#039; For Public Office, But When It Comes To Non-Believers, Many Voters Have Decided To Impose One Anyway</h4> </div>
<div class="views-row views-row-2 views-row-even">
<h3 class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/presidential-proclamations">Presidential Proclamations</a></h3>
<h4>U.S. Chief Executives Have Said Some Wonderful Things About Separation Of Church And State Over The Years. Here Are Ten Great Ones.</h4> </div>
<div class="views-row views-row-3 views-row-odd">
<h3 class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/in-the-crosshairs">In The Crosshairs</a></h3>
<h4>Having Lost The Battle Over Marriage Equality, The Religious Rights Aims Its Sights At The Transgender Community</h4> </div>
<div class="views-row views-row-4 views-row-even views-row-last">
<h3 class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/au-in-action">AU In Action </a></h3>
<h4>Staff Members And Activists Support Church-State Separation Nationwide</h4> </div>
</div>
</div> </div>
</div><div class="lower clearfix"><div class="frontpage-block frontpage-view-church-state-articles-all-articles" >
<div class="content">
<div class="view view-church-state-articles view-id-church_state_articles view-display-id-all_articles view-dom-id-68a102a8ca8c6253f488e8ac0e711a24">
<div class="view-content">
<div class="cs-department" id="section-au-bulletin"> <h3>AU Bulletin</h3>
<ul class="cs-department-list"> <li class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/creationist-will-head-ariz-education-panel">Creationist Will Head Ariz. Education Panel</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-2 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/former-atlanta-fire-chief-may-sue-over">Former Atlanta Fire Chief May Sue Over Termination</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-3 views-row-odd">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/ill-college-suspends-professor-for-islam-remarks">Ill. College Suspends Professor For Islam Remarks</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-4 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/around-the-world-indonesian-state-bans-new-year">Around The World: Indonesian State Bans New Year’s Celebrations</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-5 views-row-odd">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/us-army-approves-beard-for-sikh-soldier">U.S. Army Approves Beard For Sikh Soldier</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-6 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/va-county-closes-school-over-islam-lesson">Va. County Closes School Over Islam Lesson</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-7 views-row-odd">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/new-york-city-subsidizes-security-for-religious">New York City Subsidizes Security For Religious Schools</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-8 views-row-even views-row-last">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/au-bulletin/ky-gov-approves-marriage-license-compromise">Ky. Gov. Approves Marriage License Compromise</a></span> </div></li>
</ul></div><div class="cs-department" id="section-people--events"> <h3>People &amp; Events</h3>
<ul class="cs-department-list"> <li class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/ala-chief-justice-orders-state-judges-to">Ala. Chief Justice Orders State Judges To Reject Marriage Equality Ruling</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-2 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/au-legal-director-argues-against-voucher">AU Legal Director Argues Against Voucher Program In Nevada </a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-3 views-row-odd">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/mass-catholic-school-discriminated-against-gay">Mass. Catholic School Discriminated Against Gay Man, Court Rules </a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-4 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/sign-with-bible-passage-removed-from-colo">Sign With Bible Passage Removed From Colo. County Office After AU Complaint</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-5 views-row-odd">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/au-files-legal-briefs-in-two-cases-dealing">AU Files Legal Briefs In Two Cases Dealing With Religious Symbols</a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-6 views-row-even">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/justice-department-appointee-blocked-over">Justice Department Appointee Blocked Over Stand Opposing Church-Based Politicking </a></span> </div></li>
<li class="views-row views-row-7 views-row-odd views-row-last">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/people-events/scads-of-christian-schools-win-waivers-to">Scads Of Christian Schools Win Waivers To Federal Anti-Discrimination Law</a></span> </div></li>
</ul></div><div class="cs-department" id="section-perspective"> <h3>Perspective</h3>
<ul class="cs-department-list"> <li class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first views-row-last">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/perspective/roy-moore-an-alabama-judge-who-happens-to-be">Roy Moore: An Alabama Judge Who Happens To Be Persistently Wrong</a></span> </div></li>
</ul></div><div class="cs-department" id="section-viewpoint"> <h3>Viewpoint</h3>
<ul class="cs-department-list"> <li class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first views-row-last">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/viewpoint/a-wall-for-all">A Wall For All</a></span> </div></li>
</ul></div><div class="cs-department" id="section-editorial"> <h3>Editorial</h3>
<ul class="cs-department-list"> <li class="views-row views-row-1 views-row-odd views-row-first views-row-last">
<div class="views-field views-field-title"> <span class="field-content"><a href="/church-state/february-2016-church-state/editorial/government-s-god-scalia-and-the-fraud-of">Government’s God: Scalia And The Fraud Of ‘Ceremonial Deism’</a></span> </div></li>
</ul></div> </div>
</div> </div>
</div></div> </div> <!-- /.content -->
<footer>
<ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul> <!-- AddThis Button BEGIN -->
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style ">
<a class="addthis_button_facebook_like" fb:like:layout="button_count"></a>
<a class="addthis_button_tweet"></a>
<a class="addthis_button_google_plusone" g:plusone:size="medium"></a>
<a class="addthis_counter addthis_pill_style"></a>
</div>
<script type="text/javascript" src="//s7.addthis.com/js/250/addthis_widget.js#pubid=americansunited"></script>
<!-- AddThis Button END -->
</footer>
</article> <!-- /.node -->
</div></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-jefferson">thomas jefferson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/jimmy-carter">Jimmy Carter</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-tyler">John Tyler</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rutherford-b-hayes">Rutherford B. Hayes</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-garfield">James Garfield</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/franklin-d-roosevelt">Franklin D. Roosevelt</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/george-washington">George Washington</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/ulysses-s-grant">Ulysses S. Grant</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/white-house">White House</a></span></div></div>Mon, 01 Feb 2016 16:00:00 +0000Timothy Ritz11693 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/church-state/february-2016-church-state/featured/presidential-proclamations#commentsPresidential Proclamations: Some Chief Executive Thoughts For The Holidayhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/presidential-proclamations-some-chief-executive-thoughts-for-the-holiday-0
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">A president didn’t have to be one of the greats to make an impact on church-state relations.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><div><div><p><em>Editor's Note: Today's blog is a re-publication of an item that originally appeared on Presidents' Day 2012. </em></p><p>Today is Presidents’ Day. Celebrate by reading some great presidential classics of religious liberty!</p><p>Start with George Washington’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/washingtons-letter-to-touro.pdf">letter to Touro Synagogue</a>, one of the most succinct statements ever issued about religious liberty.</p><p>Of course, Thomas Jefferson’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/jeffersons-letter-to-the.pdf">letter to the Danbury Baptists</a>, which contains the famous “wall of separation between church and state” metaphor, is always worth your time.</p><p>Spend some time perusing James Madison’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/madisons-memorial.pdf">“Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,”</a> one of most powerful collections of arguments against religion taxes ever amassed.</p><p>Finish up with a more recent document – John F. Kennedy’s <a href="http://www.au.org/church-state/october-2010-church-state/featured/john-f-kennedy-on-religion-and-politics">1960 speech</a> to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in which he called for “absolute” separation of church and state. It’s hard to beat.</p><p>A president didn’t have to be one of the greats to make an impact on church-state relations. Even the caretakers occasionally reeled off a memorable line. <a href="http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h398.html">Here’s</a> Rutherford B. Hayes: “We all agree that neither the Government nor political parties ought to interfere with religious sects. It is equally true that religious sects ought not to interfere with the Government or with political parties. We believe that the cause of good government and the cause of religion both suffer by all such interference.”</p><p>You tell them, Rutherford!</p><p>Happy Presidents’ Day.</p></div></div><p> </p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/legal-foundations-church-state-separation">Legal Foundations of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/presidents-day-0">Presidents&#039; Day</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rutherford-b-hayes">Rutherford B. Hayes</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-jefferson">thomas jefferson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-madison">James Madison</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/george-washington">George Washington</a></span></div></div>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:23:34 +0000Rob Boston10887 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/presidential-proclamations-some-chief-executive-thoughts-for-the-holiday-0#commentsGrant’s Grand Vision: Public Schools That Welcome Allhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/grant-s-grand-vision-public-schools-that-welcome-all
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">An overlooked defender of separation of church and state: President Ulysses S. Grant</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Today is Presidents’ Day. On this day, we often recommend that you spend some time reading some of the great statements on church-state separation uttered by chief executives like <a href="https://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/jeffersons-letter-to-the.pdf">Thomas Jefferson</a> and <a href="https://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/madisons-memorial.pdf">James Madison</a>, or <a href="https://www.au.org/church-state/october-2010-church-state/featured/john-f-kennedy-on-religion-and-politics">John F. Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech</a> on religious liberty. They are certainly worth your time today.</p><p>But let’s spend a few minutes looking at another president, one whose support of church-state separation is sometimes overlooked: Ulysses S. Grant.</p><p>Grant was a brilliant general but a less successful president. Most historians criticize his two-term administration for being corrupt and scandal-wracked. The consensus on Grant tends to be that he meant well but allowed himself to be manipulated by people who had only their own interests at heart. (Not all historians feel this way. Jean Edward Smith of Marshall University<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Grant-Jean-Edward-Smith/dp/0684849275"> argues that Grant </a>has been underrated as a president.)</p><p>Despite his faults, there was one area where Grant did shine: separation of church and state. During his tenure, the idea of public education for the masses began catching on in the United States. Schools were built, and states began passing the first mandatory attendance laws.</p><p>But there was a problem: Since most Americans belonged to Protestant denominations, many people saw no problem in merging church and school. School days often began with Protestant prayers and readings from the King James Version of the Bible.</p><p>This didn’t sit well with Roman Catholics. To solve the problem, the church’s leadership suggested that the government give them tax money to operate their own private school system.</p><p>Grant had a better idea. He called for removing Protestant worship from public schools. He proposed making public schools legally non-sectarian and thus welcoming to all families. He also opposed any tax funding of religious schools.</p><p>It was visionary idea, but it may have been too far ahead of its time. In late 19th century America, many people chafed at the idea of education divorced from faith. And leaders of the Catholic Church continued to press for public funding of their schools.</p><p>Grant promoted his idea in several forums. In 1875, he delivered a speech to some Civil War veterans and used the occasion to call for non-sectarian education in “common” schools (as public schools were often called then) and church-state separation.</p><p>“Resolve that neither the state nor nation, nor both combined, shall support institutions of learning other than those sufficient to afford to every child growing up in the land the opportunity of a good common school education, unmixed with sectarian, pagan, or atheistical dogmas,” Grant said. “Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate. With these safeguards, I believe the battles which created the Army of the Tennessee will not have been fought in vain.”</p><p>A few months later, Grant, in his annual message to Congress, proposed a constitutional amendment that would require all public schools to be secular. Although the amendment as Grant envisioned it never emerged, his view did eventually take hold. In fact, some Western states adopted constitutions explicitly stating that public education must be non-sectarian. Around the same time, state courts began striking down mandatory religious exercises in public schools – a course of action endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court much later in 1962 and ’63.</p><p>It took about 100 years, but the system of non-sectarian public schools that Grant dreamed of as the best vehicle to ensure inter-faith peace came fully to pass.</p><p>Grant’s record on religious liberty isn’t perfect. In 1862, while commanding Union armies in Tennessee, Mississippi and Kentucky, he issued a general order banning Jews from these states. Grant was angry over black-market trading that he believed was helping the South. For some reason, he was convinced that Jews were behind it.</p><p>President Abraham Lincoln quickly rescinded the order. Years later, Grant claimed it had been drafted by a subordinate and that he signed it without reading it. The real story is more complicated, and there was a paper trail connecting Grant to the order. He tried to repair the damage in other ways. In 1874, he became the first U.S. president to attend the dedication of a synagogue. Most historians believe the action was part of an ongoing effort by Grant to make amends for the order.</p><p>Grant had his faults. But it’s hard to deny that he also had a vision of church-state separation and public education that, had it been adopted during his presidency, might have spared the nation no small amount of heartache.</p><p>Our public schools certainly face many challenges, but overt efforts to turn them into centers for religious proselytizing tend to collapse. They now welcome children of all faiths as well as those of no faith.</p><p>The Supreme Court made that possible – with a little help from U.S. Grant.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/legal-foundations-church-state-separation">Legal Foundations of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-grant">U.S. Grant</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-jefferson">thomas jefferson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-madison">James Madison</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/jean-edward-smith">Jean Edward Smith</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/abraham-lincoln">Abraham Lincoln</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/marshall-university">Marshall University</a></span></div></div>Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:10:43 +0000Rob Boston9658 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/grant-s-grand-vision-public-schools-that-welcome-all#commentsRemembering JFK: An Advocate For Absolute Separation Of Church And Statehttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/remembering-jfk-an-advocate-for-absolute-separation-of-church-and-state
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">In office, President John F. Kennedy pursued policies that strengthened the church-state wall.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>On Friday the nation marked the 50<sup>th</sup> anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. In the days leading up to the anniversary and over the weekend, newspapers, blogs and news sites ran scads of stories about JFK and what might have been.</p><p>Among them was a <em>Washington Post</em> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-john-f-kennedy/2013/11/13/bf1d1442-4b1a-11e3-be6b-d3d28122e6d4_story.html">column</a> asserting that Kennedy was not as liberal as people tend to believe today. This led Albert J. Menendez, a writer who worked at Americans United in the 1970s and ’80s and who authored the book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/John-F-Kennedy-Catholic-Humanist/dp/0879751096"><em>John F. Kennedy: Catholic and Humanist</em>, </a>to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-record-shows-that-john-f-kennedy-was-a-liberal-leader/2013/11/20/b40a8674-5098-11e3-9ee6-2580086d8254_story.html">take issue</a> with that claim.</p><p>This debate will go on. Kennedy was in office for less than three years. In the decades since his assassination, he has become something of a blank canvas where almost anything can be projected. What would his foreign policy have been like? Would he have shown more backbone on civil rights during a second term? Was he truly committed to what President Lyndon B. Johnson later crafted as the “Great Society”?</p><p>Historians and professors of political science will hash this out. But that does not mean JFK must remain an enigma. There are some things we can say about him with confidence. One is that he was a strong supporter of separation of church and state.</p><p>Kennedy’s Sept. 12, 1960, <a href="https://www.au.org/church-state/october-2010-church-state/featured/john-f-kennedy-on-religion-and-politics">speech </a>to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association is often quoted.</p><p>Seeking to allay fears that a Catholic president would take orders from the Vatican, Kennedy asserted,<em> “</em>I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute – where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote – where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference – and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.”</p><p>He added, “I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish – where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source – where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials – and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”</p><p>But these were not just words. Once in office, Kennedy pursued policies that strengthened the church-state wall. He rebuffed demands from the Catholic hierarchy for taxpayer aid for parochial schools, and he backed birth control programs.</p><p>The June 1963 issue of <em>Church &amp; State</em> reported that Kennedy supported federal funding of population control programs overseas. Such programs may seem commonplace today, but they were hugely controversial at the time, with the Catholic hierarchy leading the opposition. Kennedy ignored the clerics and approved the aid.</p><p>Kennedy also showed considerable political courage in June of 1962, when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down official programs of prayer in public schools. Polls showed that the <em>Engel v. Vitale</em> <a href="http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1961/1961_468/">opinion</a> was widely misunderstood and very unpopular. It would have been easy for Kennedy to engage in demagoguery.</p><p>He did the opposite. Kennedy appealed for calm and reminded Americans of the importance of the rule of law. Speaking at a press conference, he added, “In addition, we have in this case a very easy remedy and that is to pray ourselves. We can pray a good deal more at home, we can attend our churches with a good deal more fidelity and we can make the true meaning of prayer much more important in the lives of all of our children. That power is very much open to us.”</p><p>Glenn Archer, the first executive director of Americans United, praised Kennedy for his stands in favor of church-state separation. In his 1982 memoir <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Dream-Lives-On-Archer-Americans/dp/0883311038"><em>The Dream Lives On</em></a>, Archer observed, “His presidency was a golden age for the separation cause, and it was a stirring example of one politician who kept his promises to the people.”</p><p>The anniversary of the assassination led many writers to play “what if” games. It’s natural to speculate. If Kennedy had lived and gone on to win a second term, would he have perhaps cobbled together a coalition with enough power to have blunted the eventual rise of the New Right (with its strong Religious Right component)?</p><p>We can’t say. But we can say that one of the tragedies of Dallas is that we lost a leader committed to the great American principle of separation of church and state. No national leader who has come afterward has been as powerful an advocate for that protective barrier as JFK was.</p><p>We are all much poorer for that. </p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/legal-foundations-church-state-separation">Legal Foundations of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/glenn-archer">Glenn Archer</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/albert-j-menendez">Albert J. Menendez</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/greater-houston-ministerial-association">Greater Houston Ministerial Association</a></span></div></div>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 15:33:31 +0000Rob Boston9180 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/remembering-jfk-an-advocate-for-absolute-separation-of-church-and-state#comments‘A Fundamental Principle’: HHS Secretary Sebelius Affirms Church-State Separationhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/a-fundamental-principle-hhs-secretary-sebelius-affirms-church-state
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">It’s always good to hear a prominent official in government acknowledge the separation of church and state as a &#039;fundamental principle of our democracy.&#039; </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, spoke on Friday to graduates of Georgetown University’s Public Policy Institute – despite efforts to by ultra-conservatives to gag her. </p><p>Members of the Catholic far right <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76488.html">were outraged</a> that Sebelius, a Catholic and and advocate of reproductive rights, would be invited to speak at a Catholic university. But school officials believed that a high-ranking member of the Obama administration’s cabinet might have something valuable to say to the graduates and refused to rescind the invitation. (Among those complaining was Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C., who called the invitation to Sebelius "shocking.")</p><p>Sebelius had just started <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/secretary/about/speeches/sp20120518.html">her speech</a> when three protestors stood up and started yelling. This was pretty much inevitable, and the men were soon removed from the room. Sebelius continued with her remarks.</p><p>Much of what she said was typical of commencement addresses, including an exhortation to graduates to pursue public service and work for the common good while not being afraid to take on some risks and challenges.</p><p>Sebelius then shifted into a different area.</p><p>“When I was in junior high, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was running for president,” Sebelius said. “I wasn’t old enough to vote, but it was the first national campaign I really remember. Some of then-Senator Kennedy’s opponents attacked him for his religion, suggesting that electing the first Catholic president would undermine the separation of church and state, a fundamental principle of our democracy. The furor grew so loud that Kennedy chose to deliver a speech about his beliefs just seven weeks before the election.”</p><p>Sebelius continued, “In that talk to Protestant ministers, Kennedy talked about his vision of religion and the public square, and said he believed in an America, and I quote, ‘where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials – and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against us all.’”</p><p>She added, “Kennedy was elected president on November 8, 1960. And more than 50 years later, that conversation, about the intersection of our nation’s long tradition of religious freedom with policy decisions that affect the general public, continues. Contributing to these debates will require more than just the quantitative skills you have learned at Georgetown. It will also require the ethical skills you have honed – the ability to weigh different views, see issues from other points of view, and in the end, follow your own moral compass.”</p><p>There are a couple of things to say about this.</p><p>First, it’s always good to hear a prominent official in government acknowledge the separation of church and state as a “fundamental principle of our democracy.” Religious Right leaders have created an entire cottage industry to disparage the very idea of church-state separation as un-historical and un-American, and, sadly, some political leaders agree with them. It’s good to see Sebelius set them right.</p><p>Second, Sebelius reminds us of the importance of JFK’s words that no church has the right to expect government to embrace, promote and impose its theology. I’d like to think that this portion of the speech was a subtle reminder to the Catholic bishops (and people like former presidential candidate Rick Santorum), who seem to think the federal government should be the enforcer of their dogma.</p><p>Finally, Sebelius’ call to “follow your own moral compass” on these issues is crucial. Note that she didn’t say “religious compass.” For many, morals do spring from religion – but not for all. More importantly, those who do have a faith may find it necessary from time to time to dissent from denominational teachings – especially when you’re a political leader determining policy for 300 million people representing every imaginable perspective about religion.</p><p>Sebelius invoked the words of John F. Kennedy, our nation’s only Catholic president, to make the point that government is not, and cannot be, the vehicle to enforce religious rules. The Catholic bishops may not like what she said, but I suspect millions of Americans do.</p><p>I’m glad Sebelius wasn’t shouted down by extremists and theocrats who fear what she had to say.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/lobbying-by-churches-and-religious-groups">Lobbying by Churches and Religious Groups</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/other-issues-regarding-churches-and-politics">Other Issues regarding Churches and Politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/kathleen-sebelius">Kathleen Sebelius</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/georgetown-university">Georgetown University</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/department-health-and-human-services">Department of Health and Human Services</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span></div></div>Mon, 21 May 2012 16:57:56 +0000Rob Boston7156 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/a-fundamental-principle-hhs-secretary-sebelius-affirms-church-state#commentsSeparation Obfuscation: Why Cardinal Dolan And Richard Land Are No John F. Kennedyshttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/separation-obfuscation-why-cardinal-dolan-and-richard-land-are-no-john-f
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">John F. Kennedy was willing to say that if the public interest clashed with his religious beliefs, he would put the public interest first.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York City was on “Face the Nation” yesterday and managed to pull off quite a feat. <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/cardinal-dolan-defends-santorum-on-kennedy-remark/#">He said he agrees</a> with President John F. Kennedy, who in 1960 gave a famous speech calling for “absolute” separation of church and state<em>, and</em> with former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, who says that same JFK speech made him want to “throw up.”</p><p>I suspect that Dolan actually agrees more with Santorum – he’s just smart enough not to go on national television and say it.</p><p>Appearing on the same CBS program was Richard Land, head lobbyist for the Southern Baptist Convention. Like Dolan, Land endorses church-state separation in public. He sometimes even invokes historic Baptist figures like John Leland, who helped build the church-state wall. On “Face the Nation,” Land brought up Roger Williams and called church-state separation “our unique contribution.”</p><p>But of course anyone can go on television and make any kind of statement. It’s what happens after Dolan and Land leave the television studio that counts. And here their actions tell a different story.</p><p>Dolan, aided and abetted by the rest of the Catholic hierarchy, wants all of us to pay taxes to support his church’s private schools. Land also advocates tax funding of religious schools through vouchers. (And by the way, they want this funding in the form of a blank check – no significant government oversight, please.)</p><p>Dolan and Land want tax funding of various “faith-based” social services, again with no oversight. Remarkably, the bishops have gone so far as to argue that the government’s failure to extend this aid is a form of religious discrimination!</p><p>Dolan and Land want their theology to determine government national policy on reproductive issues, marriage equality and the civil rights of LGBT people. Both men seek government policies that will make it possible for the Catholic Church to impose its restrictive view on birth control on millions of Americans, many of them non-Catholics, through church-related institutions like hospitals and colleges that receive massive amounts of tax aid.</p><p>Land has even rhapsodized about some future period where evangelicals and Catholic join forces and achieve victory in the “culture wars” Luckily for the nation, that seems unlikely to happen. Most American Catholics don’t agree with the church hierarchy’s views on social issues, and polls show that younger evangelicals are breaking away from Land’s old guard on issues like gay rights.</p><p>Does that mean we can be complacent? No way. In a country where 50 percent is considered a good turnout on Election Day, a determined minority of theocrats can call the shots if the rest of us aren’t diligent.</p><p>Dolan and Land claim to support church-state separation, and Dolan even says he appreciates JFK’s famous speech. There is a passage from that speech that is often quoted: “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote, where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.”</p><p>That’s good stuff. But there’s another section of <a href="http://www.au.org/church-state/october-2010-church-state/featured/john-f-kennedy-on-religion-and-politics">the speech</a> that isn’t quoted as often that also needs to be heard and heeded: “I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me. Whatever issue may come before me as president, if I should be elected – on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject – I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be in the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressure or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.”</p><p>Kennedy was willing to say that if the public interest clashed with his religious beliefs, he would put the public interest first. Dolan and Land don’t agree. They believe a politician should put theological interests first. Therein lies the crucial difference between JFK’s interpretation of church-state separation and the version embraced by Dolan and Land. The latter protects us from a state-established church but not much else.</p><p>As a nation, we have endorsed Kennedy’s more expansive vision. We toss it aside for the Dolan/Land interpretation at our peril.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/other-issues-regarding-churches-and-politics">Other Issues regarding Churches and Politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/marriage">Marriage</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/reproductive-health-conscience-clauses-for-religious-objectors">Reproductive Health &amp; Conscience Clauses for Religious Objectors</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/cardinal-timothy-dolan">Cardinal Timothy Dolan</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/richard-land">richard land</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/face-the-nation">Face the Nation</a></span></div></div>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 15:22:33 +0000Rob Boston6965 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/separation-obfuscation-why-cardinal-dolan-and-richard-land-are-no-john-f#commentsPresidential Proclamations: Some Chief Executive Thoughts For The Holidayhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/presidential-proclamations-some-chief-executive-thoughts-for-the-holiday
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Read some presidential classics of religious liberty.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Today is Presidents’ Day. Celebrate by reading some great presidential classics of religious liberty!</p><p>Start with George Washington’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/washingtons-letter-to-touro.pdf">letter to Touro Synagogue</a>, one of the most succinct statements ever issued about religious liberty.</p><p>Of course, Thomas Jefferson’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/jeffersons-letter-to-the.pdf">letter to the Danbury Baptists</a>, which contains the famous “wall of separation between church and state” metaphor, is always worth your time.</p><p>Spend some time perusing James Madison’s <a href="http://www.au.org/files/images/page_photos/madisons-memorial.pdf">“Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,”</a> one of most powerful collections of arguments against religion taxes ever amassed.</p><p>Finish up with a more recent document – John F. Kennedy’s <a href="http://www.au.org/church-state/october-2010-church-state/featured/john-f-kennedy-on-religion-and-politics">1960 speech</a> to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in which he called for “absolute” separation of church and state. It’s hard to beat.</p><p>A president didn’t have to be one of the greats to make an impact on church-state relations. Even the caretakers occasionally reeled off a memorable line. <a href="http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h398.html">Here’s</a> Rutherford B. Hayes: “We all agree that neither the Government nor political parties ought to interfere with religious sects. It is equally true that religious sects ought not to interfere with the Government or with political parties. We believe that the cause of good government and the cause of religion both suffer by all such interference.”</p><p>You tell them, Rutherford!</p><p>Happy Presidents’ Day.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/history-and-origins-church-state-separation">History and Origins of Church-State Separation</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/george-washington">George Washington</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-jefferson">thomas jefferson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-madison">James Madison</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rutherford-b-hayes">Rutherford B. Hayes</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/presidents-day-0">Presidents&#039; Day</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/letter-touro-synagogue">Letter to Touro Synagogue</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/danbury-baptists">Danbury Baptists</a></span></div></div>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:34:05 +0000Rob Boston6786 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/presidential-proclamations-some-chief-executive-thoughts-for-the-holiday#commentsFundamentalist Forum: Religious Right To Grill Candidates On ‘Questions Of The Soul’ https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/fundamentalist-forum-religious-right-to-grill-candidates-on-%E2%80%98questions-of
<a href="/about/people/simon-brown">Simon Brown</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Today, too many candidates use their religious faith as a selling point to convince voters that they are qualified to lead this country, but last time I checked, these candidates are running for president of the United States, not senior pastor of the local church.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Tomorrow afternoon, most of the Republican presidential candidates will come together in Iowa for the latest in a seemingly endless series of debates as they try to prove to the electorate that they are qualified to be the leader of the United States.</p><p>Unlike previous debates, which have been sponsored primarily by news organizations, this one is a “forum” sponsored by an Iowa Religious Right group called The FAMiLY Leader, CitizenLink (an affiliate of the James Dobson-founded Focus on the Family) and the National Organization for Marriage.</p><p>The confirmed participants are former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.), U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) and former Sen. Rick Santorum (Pa.). Conspicuously absent are the two Mormon candidates, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman.</p><p><a href="http://www.thefamilyleader.com/pollster-frank-luntz-to-moderate-the-thanksgiving-family-forum-for-republican-presidential-candidates">The event is being billed</a> by FAMiLY Leader President Bob Vander Plaats as an opportunity “simply to learn about [candidates’] worldviews and to listen to their hearts on key family issues. The discussion will allow us to see a more personal side of the candidates.”</p><p>Oh, and the “forum” is going to take place at First Federated Church, a fundamentalist Christian congregation in Des Moines.</p><p>Tom Minnery of CitizenLink <a href="http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/individuals/tom-minnery">elaborated on</a> both the forum and its purpose recently on the <em>Janet Mefferd Show</em>. (H/T to our friends over at RightWing Watch.)</p><p>“We have decided,” said Minnery, “that, wouldn’t it be wonderful for at least one presidential debate to have the candidates respond to questions of the heart, questions of the soul? For example, I’ll just give you one of the questions we’ll be asking them: ‘If you are elected president you will be taking the oath of office, the last words in that oath of office will be ‘so help me God,’ what will that mean to you?’”</p><p>Minnery went on to say the White House hopefuls will also be questioned on same-sex marriage and other social issues near and dear to the Religious Right.</p><p>So bottom line: this event is about fundamentalist Christians grilling the candidates about their personal religious beliefs and whether they are willing to impose those beliefs on all Americans through government action.</p><p>Where have you gone, John F. Kennedy? As a candidate in 1960, the future president addressed concerns that as a Catholic, he would answer to the Pope.</p><p>“I believe in an America,” he said, in a famous address to Protestant clergy in Houston, “where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.”</p><p>Today, too many candidates use their religious faith as a selling point to convince voters that they are qualified to lead this country, but last time I checked, these candidates are running for president of the United States, not senior pastor of the local church. Candidates for office should not devote large amounts of time (the upcoming Iowa forum is scheduled to last two hours) to politically charged professions of faith.</p><p>Religious Right leaders spend an awful lot of time ranting about how America is going down the drain. Yet when they sponsor a forum where the candidates get an opportunity to speak, the White House hopefuls are not asked to offer solutions to any of the issues that are truly harming the United States, like the economy and foreign policy.</p><p>Instead, as usual, Religious Right zealots just want to do everything they can to impose their religious beliefs on all of us through the political process.</p><p>As JFK also said in 1960: “These are the real issues which should decide this campaign. And they are not religious issues – for war and hunger and ignorance and despair know no religious barriers.”</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/prayer-at-government-events-and-legislative-meetings">Prayer at Government Events and Legislative Meetings</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/religious-groups-involvement-in-candidate-elections">Religious Groups’ Involvement in Candidate Elections</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/focus-family">Focus On The Family</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/national-organization-for-marriage">National Organization for Marriage</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/family-leader">FAMiLY Leader</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/herman-cain">Herman Cain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rick-perry">Rick Perry</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/ron-paul">Ron Paul</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/michele-bachmann">Michele Bachmann</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/mitt-romney">Mitt Romney</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/newt-gingrich">Newt Gingrich</a></span></div></div>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 20:17:06 +0000Simon Brown6384 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/fundamentalist-forum-religious-right-to-grill-candidates-on-%E2%80%98questions-of#commentsSlander From Santorum: Former Senator Once Again Proves That He’s No Jack Kennedyhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/slander-from-santorum-former-senator-once-again-proves-that-he%E2%80%99s-no-jack
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Sen. Santorum, don’t think you can turn this country into a modern version of medieval Spain with iPods and Twitter. We won’t have it.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>We’ve criticized former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum on this blog <a href="http://blog.au.org/2010/09/08/absolute-separation-jfk%E2%80%99s-houston-speech-upheld-true-spirit-of-liberty/">before</a> for his poor understanding of church-state separation.</p>
<p>Santorum believes President John F. Kennedy was wrong when, in a famous 1960 speech, Kennedy vowed to be the president of all people and make his policy decisions not on the basis of what his Roman Catholic faith demanded but on the grounds of what was good for the country.</p>
<p>Here in part is what Kennedy said in his Sept. 12, 1960, <a href="http://www.au.org/media/church-and-state/archives/2010/10/john-f-kennedy-on-religion.html">address in Houston</a>:</p>
<p>“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute – where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote – where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference – and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.</p>
<p>“I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish – where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source – where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials – and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”</p>
<p>Good stuff, that.</p>
<p>Santorum disagrees. During a <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2011/03/santorum_possib.html">recent speech</a> in Newton, Mass., Santorum said he was “frankly appalled” by Kennedy’s statement, adding, “That was a radical statement [that did] great damage.”</p>
<p>Continued Santorum, “We’re seeing how Catholic politicians, following the first Catholic president, have followed his lead, and have divorced faith not just from the public square, but from their own decision-making process. Jefferson is spinning in his grave.”</p>
<p>To Santorum, I can only say: Look, it’s bad enough that you run around talking trash about Kennedy, but adding Jefferson to your Festival of Ignorance is just too much. Leave the man out of it. You apparently know nothing about him.</p>
<p>Jefferson spent his entire life opposing government-mandated religion and fought every member of the clergy who supported that foul idea. Here’s a famous example: During the election of 1800, presidential candidate Jefferson knew that many New England preachers were yearning to win favoritism for their faith from the federal government. He also knew that they hated him because they realized he would never let that happen. That’s why they spread wild tales about Jefferson being a libertine who, if elected, would burn Bibles.</p>
<p>Wrote Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, “The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, &amp; they believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” (Those words might sound familiar; they’re carved on the Jefferson Memorial here in Washington, D.C.)</p>
<p>If anything is causing Jefferson to spin in his grave, it would be the machinations of people like Santorum, who want to mix church and state into a poisonous theocratic gumbo and force-feed it to the American people.</p>
<p>No thanks, Rick. We know all about the theocracies you admire so much. They don’t work because they crush human freedom. We found a better way: separation of church and state. Supporting that good old American concept is hardly “radical.” In fact, I’d say the real radicals are the ones who want to tear it down.</p>
<p>Believe what you want about religion, Rick. Pray, go to mass and engage in other religious activities of your choosing. But don’t think you can turn this country into a modern version of medieval Spain with iPods and Twitter. We won’t have it.</p>
<p>In his famous speech, JFK eloquently laid out a vision of freedom of religion for all in a country that did not presume to aid or hinder faith. The choice of whether to take part in a faith community is always yours. Santorum has made his vision clear as well. It’s one that crushes freedom under the heavy heel of government-sponsored religion.</p>
<p>I think I know which vision the American people prefer.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/fighting-religious-right">Fighting the Religious Right</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/benjamin-rush">Benjamin Rush</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/church-state-milestones">Church-State Milestones</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/jefferson-memorial">Jefferson Memorial</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/religion-and-politics">Religion and politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/religion-politics">Religion in Politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rick-santorum">Rick Santorum</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-jefferson">thomas jefferson</a></span></div></div>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:27:25 +0000Rob Boston2174 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/slander-from-santorum-former-senator-once-again-proves-that-he%E2%80%99s-no-jack#commentsPalin’s Pabulum: Former Half-Term Alaska Governor Is No Jack Kennedyhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/palin%E2%80%99s-pabulum-former-half-term-alaska-governor-is-no-jack-kennedy
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">What Sarah Palin really wants is a religious test for public office.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Every now and then you read a smackdown that can only be called definitive.</p>
<p>I experienced one of those moments recently reading Kathleen Kennedy’s Townsend’s <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120303209.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&amp;sid=ST2010120305853">response</a> to Sarah Palin’s recent observations about President John F. Kennedy’s views on religion and politics.</p>
<p>Townsend, a former lieutenant governor of Maryland, is one of Robert F. Kennedy’s children, making her JFK’s niece. She is a visiting fellow at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and also teaches at Georgetown University’s Public Policy Center. She authored the 2007 <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Failing-Americas-Faithful-Churches-Politics/dp/B001JJBOHO/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1291653183&amp;sr=1-1">book </a><em>Failing America's Faithful: How Today's Churches Are Mixing God with Politics and Losing Their Way</em>.</p>
<p>Palin is, well, Sarah Palin. She was U.S. Sen. John McCain’s running mate in 2008, served a half term as Alaska’s governor and before that was the mayor of town of 10,000 people. She is currently starring in a reality-television show on the TLC network.</p>
<p>Pitting these two is a sort of “Bambi vs. Godzilla” exercise. Palin felt compelled to comment on JFK’s famous 1960 speech on religion and politics in her new <a href="http://www.amazon.com/America-Heart-Reflections-Family-Faith/dp/0062010964/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1291653263&amp;sr=1-1">book</a>, <em>America By Heart</em>. Palin is not a fan of that address, which is generally regarded as one of the most effective political speeches of the modern era.</p>
<p>During the speech, JFK explained to a group of Protestant ministers that he was not the Roman Catholic candidate for president – he was a Democratic candidate who happened to be Catholic. He criticized “religious tests” for public office, vowed to make his decisions on the basis of national interest (not his religion) and for good measure endorsed church-state separation. (You can read the background of the speech <a href="http://www.au.org/media/church-and-state/archives/2010/10/absolute-separation.html">here</a>. This article also contains a link to the text.)</p>
<p>All of this was too much for Palin, who asserted that Kennedy’s speech was “defensive” and led to an “unequivocal divorce” between private faith and public life.</p>
<p>In her reply, Townsend patiently explained how Palin got it wrong. Townsend points out that Palin’s beef isn’t really with Townsend’s uncle, it’s with the Constitution. What Palin really wants is a religious test for public office.</p>
<p>“Palin’s argument seems to challenge a great American tradition, enshrined in the Constitution, stipulating that there be no religious test for public office,” Townsend writes. “A careful reading of her book leads me to conclude that Palin wishes for precisely such a test. And she seems to think that she, and those who think like her, are qualified to judge who would pass and who would not.”</p>
<p>If this indeed Palin’s thinking, then it puts her squarely in the camp of many misguided Religious Right activists over the years who have insisted that only certain believers (ones who think as they do) are fit to hold public office.</p>
<p>“Palin’s book makes clear just how dangerous her proposed path can be,” observes Townsend. “Not only does she want people to reveal their beliefs, but she wants to sit in judgment of them if their views don’t match her own. For instance, she criticizes Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), a Democrat and a faithful Catholic, for ‘talking the (God) talk but not walking the walk.’ Who is Palin to say what God’s ‘walk’ is? Who anointed her our grand inquisitor?”</p>
<p>I could say more, but you would do better to read Townsend’s <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/03/AR2010120303209.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&amp;sid=ST2010120305853">column</a>. Her critique of Palin’s latest collection of inane scribblings is on point – and devastating.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-f-kennedy">John F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/kathleen-kennedy-townsend">Kathleen Kennedy Townsend</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/robert-f-kennedy">Robert F. Kennedy</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/sarah-palin">sarah palin</a></span></div></div>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 18:05:01 +0000Rob Boston2141 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/palin%E2%80%99s-pabulum-former-half-term-alaska-governor-is-no-jack-kennedy#comments